Follow UNISPAL Twitter RSS
PROVISIONAL VERBATIM RECORD OF THE EIGHTH MEETING
Held at Headquarters New York,
on Wednesday, 3 February 1982, at 3 p.m.
President: Mr. KITTANI Mrs. MARTINEZ (Iraq)
The situation in the occupied Arab territories /5/ (continued)
This record contains the original text of speeches delivered in English and interpretations of speeches in the other languages. The final text will be printed in the Official Records of the General Assembly.
Corrections should be submitted to original speeches only. They should be sent under the signature of a member of the delegation concerned, within one week, to the Chief of the Official Records Editing Section, Department of Conference Services; room A-3550, 866 United Nations Plaza, and incorporated in a copy of the record.
The meeting was called to order at 3.30 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM 5 (continued)
THE SITUATION IN THE OCCUPIED ARAB TERRITORIES
Mr. RAMDHANNY (Grenada): Mr. President, the delegation of Grenada, wishes to express its satisfaction at seeing you preside over the proceedings of this emergency special session of the General Assembly to consider Israel's illegal annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights. We are confident that your wisdom, your proven diplomatic competence and your profound attachment to causes that are just will serve the international community well in this time of great danger rind crisis .
I should also like to take this opportunity to congratulate Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar on his election to the exalted post of Secretary -General of this great world Organization. we wish him success in the discharge of his many onerous tasks.
The convening of this emergency special session of the General Assembly has been occasioned by our common desire yet once more to pool our energies in order to redress thin long-standing imbalance to get the offender to accept the only just and honourable solution there could ever be to this act of studied aggression and outright brigandage.
Put this time there is an awesome new factor. The shadow of an unlawful annexation has multiplied the degree of contempt and moral degeneration has descended further into abject political desperation and sheer madness.
The decision of Zionist Israel to annex the Golan Heights; national territory of the sovereign State of Syria and an integral part of the homeland of the Arab people is notorious for its illegality, but even more notorious for its classic imperialist pattern and the active and secretly boastful connivance of the friends of Zionism.
Imperialism and the tactics of imperialism throughout the ages have been served by the annexing of free peoples the grabbing of their lands the subjugation of the people in peonage and slavery, be it political, economic or social. The victims of those unconscionable acts of aggression have been deprived s inter alia, of their language culture and individuality and the right to pursue life, liberty and happiness in accordance with their own internally generated forms.
Today Israel must be condemned for its vicious acts of aggression against Syria and the Arab peoples, but so also must we vigorously condemn those who encourage and condone these premeditated crimes as well as those who give Israel the military muscle to invade and annex the sovereign territory of its neighbours. Today Zionist Israel is on trial but so also are those who directly and in other ways assist Zionism in the commission of these unspeakable acts of violence against innocent Arab men, women and children.
In his address to the thirty-sixth session of the General Assembly, Grenada's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Unison Whiteman stated: "Zionism is an indisputable form of racism which, like its twin brother. South Africa's apartheid, has been nurtured on aggression and expansionism." (A/36/PV.33, p.82)
It is therefore not surprising that the racists in South Africa who hold millions of black people in concentration camps are among the tiny clique that thunderously applauds the latest in the apparently unending series of acts of aggression against our Arab brothers and sisters. Today as we focus our attention on the annexation by Israel of the Golan Heights it would be a gigantic historical error to isolate the most recent act of terrorism from other criminal acts committed in the name of Zionism against sovereign Arab States over the past four decades. Today Zionist intransigence persists. Israel continues to defy resolutions passed by this body. Israel continues to scorn international standards of morality and decency. In 1948 Israel began the process of the gradual annexation of Arab land. In 1967 Israel waged war on Arab States and occupied the rest of Palestine and part of the sovereign territory of Syria and Egypt. Zionist guns and bombs have brought death and unthinkable destruction to towns, villages and Palestinian camps in Lebanon. More recently, people of conscience the world over were shocked when Israel destroyed the Iraqi nuclear facility which was regarded internationally as an establishment for peaceful purposes.
The matter before us was debated in the Security Council. In its resolution 497 (1981) the Council emphasized its rejection of the Israeli decision to annex the Golan Heights and declared it null and void. Israel has responded with nothing but contempt for the Security Council's decision.
The United Nations cannot countenance those and other flagrant violations of its decisions, resolutions and the very raison d'etre of its existence. We are mandated by the freedom loving peoples to take stern measures in order to force Israel to act in accordance with international norms.
At this Juncture my delegation is happy to associate itself with those delegations that have praised the Syrian Arab Republic for its sober and very mature diplomatic response in the face of this unprecedented act of provocation. The Grenada delegation reaffirms its support for the Syrian Arab Republic and the just cause of the Arab peoples. We reiterate the request of the movement of Non -Aligned countries and of several other delegations to the Security Council and the United Nations General Assembly to adopt measures under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations in order to force Israel to return all occupied Syrian lands to the full sovereignty of the Syrian Arab Republic and to withdraw from all Arab territories, including Jerusalem. This is a necessary prerequisite for the restoration of the inalienable rights of the Arab people over its national territory and the establishing of a just and lasting peace in the Saddle East.
Mr. MAVROMMATIS (Cyprus): The case before this emergency special session of the General Assembly is a striking reminder to the international community of the unfortunate existence in our world today of intolerable and flagrant violations of the basic principles of the Charter of the United Nations and the peremptory norms of international law and, at the same time, of the inability of this Organization to ensure the implementation of its own decisions.
The recent failure of the Security Council to take appropriate measures against Israel under Chapter VII of the Charter constitutes an additional blow to the credibility of the United Nations. Refusal by any Member State to comply with binding decisions of the Security Council and flouting and defiance of this Organization should not and cannot be permitted. The Security Council cannot and should not fail to ensure implementation of its own decisions by taking appropriate measures whenever necessary. Mere condemnation of a clear-cut case of defiance of the will of the Council without any enforcement action would obviously belittle the Security Council's authority and erode the very fibre of the Organization's effectiveness. This applies to the present case before this Assembly as, indeed, it does to other similar cases.
The situation created by Israel's decision to annex the occupied Syrian Golan Heights and, despite the universal condemnation of that action embodied in Security Council resolution 497 (l98l), the failure of the Council to implement its decision pose a serious threat to international peace and security and jeopardize the fundamental principles involved, which should unfailingly govern the conduct of nations.
I need not elaborate on the reasons why my Government is particularly sensitive to all issues relating to aggression, occupation, the acquisition of territory as a result of recourse to force or the expulsion of peoples from their homes and lands; nor do I need to explain the reasons why some delegations condemn more strongly than others the annexation of occupied lands by the occupying Powers.
For these reasons, as well as because of our close relations with Syria and the Arab world, we are compelled, to speak in the way we do on the issues now under consideration. But we are also here today for an additional reason: namely, the strong position we have adopted on the imperative necessity for the implementation of decisions of the United Nations in General and those of the Security Council in particular. This is a concern that goes to the very heart of the functioning of this Organization and the means of securing the implementation of Security Council resolutions. This provision of the Charter is mandatory. Yet until now, a plethora of Security Council resolutions pertaining to the Middle East, Namibia and Cyprus remain unimplemented and inoperative, to the detriment of international peace and security.
The attitude of the occupying Power to the Syrian Golan Heights and to all the other occupied Arab and Palestinian territories is a direct challenge to the United Nations and to its Charter. The continued policies of annexation, colonization and expropriation followed by that Power violate international law and. the fundamental principles of the Charter. They contravene the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, which prohibits tampering in any way with territories under military occupation moreover, they ignore the relevant resolutions of the United Nations.
If this situation or any similar situations are allowed to persist without any punitive action on the part of this Organization, then a dangerous precedent will have been set that will put into jeopardy the credibility and the very existence of the United Nations, as emulation would eventually become not the exception but the order of the day. And, we have already seen carbon copies of such actions, even in our own region.
The policy of creating faits accomplis through the use of force and the violation of the fundamental rights and freedoms of peoples, whether practised and pursued in the occupied Arab and Palestinian territories or elsewhere, has constantly been condemned and rejected by the international community.
My Government's position on the issue before this Assembly, which is directly linked to the whole Middle East problem, is very clear and firm and is based on the well-established principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory through military conquest. The occupation of territories by force is inadmissible and violates the fundamental principles of the Charter and general international law and is therefore to be strongly condemned, whether practised in the occupied Arab and Palestinian territories or, I repeat, elsewhere.
Furthermore, once occupation of land by military conquest occurs, in accordance with articles 47 and 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention the fruits of aggression shall be denied to the occupying Power, which has no authority and no justification whatsoever for altering the legal status of the occupied territories or changing their demographic characteristics.
In conclusion, I wish to stress that the case before this Assembly constitutes a serious breach of the fundamental rights and principles enshrined in our Charter, which should at all times govern the conduct of Member States. Every occupying Power should realize that aggression and occupation do not entail any rights whatsoever over the occupied territory which remain foreign land which will inevitably have to be restored to its rightful owners.
We are ready to support a resolution that seeks to redress the present unacceptable and illegal state of affairs in the occupied Arab lands.
Mr. RACZ (Hungary) (interpretation from French):
First and foremost, on behalf of the Hungarian delegation. I should like once again to extend to you my congratulations and to express my very good wishes for every success in the performance of your tasks as President of the ninth emergency special session of the General Assembly.
I believe that all who are present here are quite clear about the reasons which led to the convening of this emergency special session devoted to the question of Israeli action to annex the Golan Heights.
The first of these reasons is the attitude of Israel, which - by continuing the policy that it has now pursued for several decades - has once again completely disregarded the provisions of pertinent documents of the United Nations, specifically General Assembly resolution 36/226 B and Security Council resolution 497 (l98l) - which was unanimously adopted.
Other reasons for the convening of this session are to be found in the actions of the United States which, mindful only of its great-Power ambitions in the Middle East and disregarding its special responsibility for the maintenance of world peace and the strengthening of international security, made it impossible during the second, phase of the Security Council debate, to apply the effective measures and sanctions which might have led to the cancellation of Tel Aviv's decision and. prevented the completion of the Israeli annexationist plans. Furthermore; by abusing the right of veto conferred upon it by the United Nations Charter, it even blocked the adoption of a draft resolution providing for minimal measures.
I should like to make it clear at the very outset of my statement that, considering the background and the current situation, my delegation was in favour of convening this emergency special session of the General Assembly, for we believe that in full accord with the Charter of the United Nations, efforts should be made at all levels in the world Organization, including in this forum, to eliminate a situation which has come about as a result of the Israeli action and which endangers international peace and security.
That is why we asked to speak in this debate, we are convinced - and none of the cynical remarks made by some can in any way change that conviction - that no one who is motivated, by goodwill and who is peace-loving can remain unmoved by the series of Israeli actions which make a mockery of the most elementary principles of relations between States.
As I have already had the opportunity of emphasizing in my statement during the Security Council debate, we consider that the Israeli decision to extend its laws, jurisdiction and administration to the occupied Syrian Golan Heights is null end void and without international legal effect. That is why we fully support the resolution unanimously adopted by the Security Council which described this aggressive action by Israel in those terras and which called upon it forthwith and unconditionally to rescind, its decision to annex the Golan Heights. We are firmly convinced that the measures taken by Israel are a flagrant violation of international law, that they are contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Charter of the United Nations and of the most elementary norms of the international code of conduct, and that they are incompatible with the provisions of the 1949 Geneva Convention on occupied territories.
The Israeli action infringes the sovereignty of the Syrian Arab Republic a State Member of the United Nations, it further poisons the atmosphere in the Middle East region, and finally it is a threat to international peace and security.
We consider that all of Israel's efforts and quibbles are completely pointless, for facts are facts. Despite all the attempts at camouflage and false interpretation, it is clear to everyone that the Israeli action to annex the Syrian Golan Heights is a further manifestation of the aggressive and expansionist ambitions of the Tel Aviv Government. It stems from a policy which also includes, under the pretext of safeguarding the so-called security interests of Israel, devastating attacks repeatedly launched against neighbouring countries and the other States of the region as well as against the Palestinian Arab people, which has been ousted from its homeland. Those aggressive measures are hypocritically referred to as "preventive strikes".
This policy of the Israeli leadership, and the methods of carrying it out, have aroused the indignation of international public opinion and been met with abhorrence by the overwhelming majority of States Members of the United Nations. The world is almost unanimous in demanding that Israel should cease its acts of violence and abandon its policy, which perpetuates the Middle East crisis and steadily increases the tension in that region. But Tel Aviv completely ignores the wishes of international public opinion. It challenges the authority of the United Nations and rejects out of hand all its resolutions which criticize Israel's aggressive policies and the manoeuvres which are a part of them. Israel is able to do this because the United States - which is pursuing its own selfish interests and which considers Israel its main ally in the Middle East - gives its unprincipled support to the illegal ambitions of the Israeli Government, which undermine the basic interests of the other States of the region.
The co-operation between Israel and its principal protector - a spectacular demonstration of which we have all seen in recent weeks - has once again unmasked the true nature of the role being played by those two countries on the Middle East chessboard. It has thrown a harsh light on the ulterior motives behind the attempts at a settlement they advocate as well as on the true content of the offers to negotiate so generously made by Israel to its Arab neighbours.
In the opinion of the Hungarian Government, unilateral measures aimed at demonstrating superior strength are inadmissible. History and past experience have given striking proof that such measures are useless in the long run. Furthermore, in the light of the failure - increasingly obvious to all - of the movement for a so-called separate peace, which aims at partial solutions, it should be very clear now that the problems of the Middle East region and the over-all crisis can only be satisfactorily and finally resolved except within the framework of a comprehensive, just and lasting settlement.
In our opinion, such a settlement can he worked out only with the participation on an equal footing of all the parties concerned without exception, including the Palestine Liberation Organization, which has been recognized by the United Nations as the sole authentic representative of the Arab people of Palestine.
It is in the light of that consideration that we have welcomed and supported the initiative taken by the Soviet Union to convene an international conference on that basis. We are convinced that such an international conference, organized in the spirit of the relevant positions taken by the United Nations, would make a major contribution towards the establishment of peace in the Middle East. For that reason, our world Organization too has the duty to promote the implementation of that proposal.
We are firmly convinced that the comprehensive settlement that should be drawn up by this body, or any just and lasting solution to the Middle East crisis, should be based on these three fundamental elements: the unconditional withdrawal by Israel from all the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, the recognition and exercise of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including the right to the creation of an independent State; and the safeguarding of the peace and security of all the States of the region within secure boundaries and with international guarantees.
It is the basic duty of the international community to do everything in its power to promote the achievement of a comprehensive, just and lasting settlement of the Middle East crisis on the basis of the aforementioned principles and to eliminate any obstacles that stand in the way of such a solution.
It is in this spirit that, in relation to the item that is on the agenda of the ninth emergency special session of the General Assembly, we support any efforts aimed at inducing Israel through effective and firm measures to give up the aggressive policies which tend to perpetuate the consequences of its previous acts of aggression and to accept a solution that respects the interests of all peoples and States in the region.
Mr. KRAVETS (Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic) (interpretation from Russian)- Israel's annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights occupied as a result of aggression has evoked considerable indignation and wrath in the world which has been reflected in the unanimous Security Council resolution 491 (1981) of 17 December and General Assembly resolution 36/226 B. Those resolutions clearly indicate that Israel's decision to extend its legislation jurisdiction and administration in the occupied Syrian Golan Heights is invalid and has no international legal force. It also contains a demand that Israel, the occupying Power, should immediately rescind that decision. In December 198l, the General Assembly requested the Security Council, in the event of Israel's non-compliance with that resolution, to invoke Chapter VII of the Charter of the United nations, and the Council in its turn determined that in that case it would consider taking appropriate steps in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
What was Israel's reaction? As we all know, once again Tel Aviv, with its customary cynicism and impudence, completely ignored the clearly expressed and clearly formulated opinion of an overwhelming majority of the countries and peoples of the world. Immediately after the Security Council adopted resolution 597 (198l), the Israeli representative declared that his Government would not recognize that resolution. Then this provocative position was confirmed in Israel's replies to the questionnaire of the Secretary-General and in statements made by the official leadership of Israel. Mr. Begin stated,
"The law pertaining to the Golan Heights will remain unchanged. There is no force on earth that can force us to rescind it".
The leaders of Tel Aviv quite rightly calculated that their overseas protector and defender would not allow Israel to be hurt. The Christian Science Monitor of 23 December wrote, "Begin is calculating that the United States will vote against sanctions and Israel will not in fact abrogate its decision".
Subsequent events have indicated that the aggressor was not mistaken in the loyalty of its strategic ally, the United States, which, as before, openly protected the actions of Tel Aviv and vetoed the draft resolution that demanded that all Member States should consider applying concrete and effective measures in order to nullify the Israeli annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights and to refrain from providing any assistance or aid to and co-operation with Israel, in all fields; (S/l4832/Rev.l, operative para. 3).
Five of the nine emergency special sessions of the United Nations General Assembly were convened in connexion with the explosive situation that threatens international peace and security that had been created by Israel's aggressive acts against Arab countries and the long-suffering Palestinian people. The list of the aggressor's acts over the last two years includes the annexation of East Jerusalem as a result of which the feelings of hundreds of millions of believers of various faiths were trampled underfoot the piratical attack on the atomic research centre in Iraq; the devastating bombing of the capital of Lebanon, which led to the deaths of hundreds of civilians, including women and children- and finally this new act of piracy, the annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights. The leaders of Israel did not hide their annexationist designs on the West Bank of the Jordan and the Gaza Strip, which were occupied in 1967. The press has given us very gloomy communiques with regard to fresh acts of aggression being planned by Tel Aviv, including a mass attack on southern Lebanon, terrorist action against the Palestine Liberation Organization and an attack on a Libyan atomic research station as well as flights over the territory of Saudi Arabia and other countries.
Responsibility for the policy of piracy and aggression practised by Israel against the Arab peoples is borne by the United States of America, which has given Israel comprehensive political, economic and military assistance and support. The fact that this assistance amounts to a very significant sum was recently indicated in The New York Times. Each year, Israel receives from the United States, from the American taxpayer, $2.2 billion. Militaristic Israel receives many hundreds of millions of dollars from Zionist organizations.
The aggressive policies of Tel Aviv are in fact a continuation of the imperialist policies of the United States in the Middle East. The United States has chosen Israel as its chief instrument in order to implement its own plans to establish domination over the Middle East, which it has declared a "vital sphere of influence" for it, and this is precisely the reason that the United States has done everything it can to stymie the efforts of the international community to restrain the aggressor and to take steps to establish a just and durable peace in the Middle Fast."
As we stated before the Security Council, the Ukrainian people, like all Soviet peoples resolutely condemns the expansionist policies of Israel and the United States policy of condoning the acts of the aggressor. Our sympathies and support have constants been with Syria and with the just cause of other Arab peoples, including the people of Palestine.
The international community expects that this emergency special session of the General Assembly of the United Nations will forthrightly condemn the provocative and usurpatory policies of Israel. In the opinion of the Ukrainian SSR, this session should demand the unconditional and immediate rescinding by Israel of its decision regarding the Golan Heights that proper stops be taken against Israel in accordance with Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter and that, any military or other assistance to it should cease.
Mrs. Martinez (Mexico), Vice-President, took the Chair.
Mr. VELAYATI (Iran) (spoke in Persian, English text furnished by the delegation) In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful. "Already has Our Word been passed before (this) to Our Servants sent (by us), that they would certainly be assisted and that Our forces, they surely must conquer."
On behalf of the revolutionary Moslems of Iran, I extend my greetings to the gallant champions of the oppressed and liberated nations of the world who bravely struggle against oppression, dictatorship and arrogance. I pay a tribute to the memory of the martyrs of aggression, of imperialism and of the .liberation movements of nations, particularly in Palestine, as well as, the martyrs in the struggle of falsehood against right.
Almost half a century has now passed since 1935, when the martyr Gheikh Ezzoddin Ghpssam, the Moslem and freedom-loving clergyman of Palestine assumed leadership in the uprisings of the region against British imperialism and the Zionist usurpers; but, owing to the Zionist acts of aggression, supported by global imperialism. Palestine is still trampled underfoot by the boots of the imperialists.
A year later the monarchs of the time sent the brave people of Palestine a message ordering them to stay calm, and then John Phillip, the representative of British imperialism, together with the representative of one of the dependent countries in the region, went to Palestine to quell the general uprisings and the protest of the Moslem people of Palestine. At that time the Moslem Arab poet, the famous martyr Abdulrahim Mahmoud, took a defiant position and, in his poetry address to them, said:
"In the near and very near future, nothing shall remain except tears streaming from our eyes and the clenching of our teeth." And so it happened. Palestine, as a result of the decision made by the League of Nations, was divided into two: a Zionist and an Arab part. And in the course of years, notwithstanding numerous battles, the catastrophe facing us today became a reality. The catastrophe is, in brief, the Zionist aggression supported by imperialism, the occupation of the Islamic territory of the Palestinians, the continued expansion of the Zionist non-entity and its further encroachment on more and more of the Arab world in an effort to fulfil the illusionary promise of a territory extending from the Euphrates to the Nile.
As we have gathered today to consider the illegal, aggressive act of the Zionist regime now occupying Palestine because of its annexation of the Golan Heights we need to cast a "brief glance at the past record of such aggressions in general and the sad story of the Palestinian crisis in particular. In this context we have to unmask the role of the imperialist Powers responsible for the entire crisis in the area, as well as in the rest of the oppressed world, from Viet Nam to Latin America, in order to arouse world public opinion and the world's conscience so that people may better remember who is solely responsible for all the contemporary human miseries, namely, the arrogant Government of the United States. In propagating the political cancer of Israel in the heart of the Islamic and Arab world and in giving support to the loathed regime of the buried Shah, that symbol of global arrogance - the Great Satan has ultimately no intention other than that of shackling the rising and freedom-seeking nations of the world.
Irmui Khoemini, the leader of the Islamic Revolution of Iran, in the early stages of his movement some 20 years ago, expressed the matter thus:
"It is America that supports Israel and its allies. It is America that empowers Israel to render the Moslem Arabs homeless. Let the world know that all the problems of the Iranian nation and of other Moslem nations come from America."
Some 34 years ago, at the instigation of the world- devouring Powers, the partition of Palestine,and hence the paving of the road to the establishment of an aggressive and expansionist regime called Israel, was approved. During this long period, the people of Palestine whose only crime was their love for their homeland were deprived of all fundamental rights and privileges.
Paralysed by the influence and intervention of the Satanic Powers, and consequently unable to take any decisive and constructive measures, the international organizations have practically surrendered in the face of this criminal situation.
The fact is that the annexation of the Golan Heights is only one part of the episode, and certainly not the last one. So long as expansion from the Euphrates to the Nile is the dream of the racist Zionists, so long as the merciless tradition of reliance on force and savagery constitutes the principal linchpin of the policy of the Zionists and of their imperialist supporters, headed by America, providing for all their needs from bread to bombers, this tragedy will continue.
For the growth of this unholy sapling, the global imperialist supporters of the Zionist regime have adopted an evil long-term policy the major characteristics of which are as follows.
First, perpetual emphasis on the claim that the Zionists in Palestine are entitled to undeniable rights and on the necessity of their peaceful coexistence with the native-born inhabitants of the region - although the term "peaceful coexistence" applies only to native-born Jews and not to the immigrants who have illegally usurped the sacred land highly respected by the followers of the revealed religions of Islam, Christianity and Judaism.
Secondly, full recognition of the Zionist regime occupying Palestine, supporting it politically as well as militarily, with the aim of destroying every element of the liberation movement, and subduing all followers of truth and justice by indoctrinating them with the psychology of self-humiliation and by convincing them of the invincibility of their enemy. Eventually the same policy was introduced in Iran in order fully to convince the oppressed Moslems of the myth that neither the Shah's regime nor the idol of America could be toppled.
Thirdly, unconditional support for the Zionist regime in international organizations and the constant effort made to present it as an undeniable fact in the Middle East by impressing this on public opinion.
The great Powers, headed by America, have cunningly adopted political tricks such as abstaining in order to conceal their true evil intentions, but when circumstances so required, they allowed their wicked intentions to be revealed, and therefore unjustifiably exercised the privilege of the veto to engineer the whole situation in their own favour.
It is a pity to see that some of the Arab States, which consider the Palestinian issue to be their fundamental problem and therefore relinquish their militancy towards oppression and aggression, have been deceived by criminal America to the point of falling into the trap of submissiveness and compromise with the enemy, thus widening the existing gap between themselves and their nations. It is hard to believe that those States are oblivious of the true objective of the Great Satan. By persuading certain Arab States to make peace with Israel, the United States is trying to divide the militant Palestinians and to build up a strong political front in the region. By settling the conflict with Israel, the front would then be free to prepare the way for the complete political domination of the Middle East by the United States.
In the meantime, the United States by carrying out military manoeuvres such as "Bright Star" and sending "Rapid Deployment Forces" into the region, is trying to achieve its Satanic goals by a show of its military strength. It is in this context that all the truth-loving forces of the world have expressed their firm opposition to the first as well as to the second Camp David. They cannot tolerate the fact that certain selfish power-hungry groups unjustly are selling out Islam to American imperialism.
It is regrettable to see that words such as "peace", "security", "human rights" and "peaceful solutions" have lost their true meaning - thanks to world imperialism - and have been interpreted and used to protect the interests of usurpers.
The history of the struggles for the liberation of Palestine has shown that since the first heroic uprising of the Moslem people of Palestine during the period 1911-1913, which took the form of establishing resistance movements in the cities of Jaffa and Haifa, the only effective strategy against the enemy is face-to-face struggle. It is the resistance of the Palestinian people against General Assembly in 19l8, the uprising of the Palestinians in 1935 and 1936, the wars of independence since 1948 and the military operations of Palestinian fadaees, which constitutes the most realistic approach of the Moslem Arab nations to deterring the Zionist aggression, and not submissiveness of the kind that turned the great victory of 1973 into a humiliating defeat by welcoming and following step by step the Satanic policy of Zionist Henry Kissinger. Sadat, by confirming the shameful Camp David agreement and accepting a separate deal with the enemy, turned his back on the Islamic community, as well as on his own nation, and recorded his name as a traitor in the history of Islam.
In the context of the struggle against universal arrogance, what good is the withdrawal of the Zionist forces from Sinai not to speak of the return of a large portion of it to the American forces, which means ignoring the sovereignty of Egypt over the Sinai and the fundamental problem of Palestine.
Were the Camp David accords able to put an end to the savage bombardments of Lebanon or to the expansionist aims of the Zionist regime occupying Al-Quds, or even to reduce the suffocating pressure on the Palestinians, the explosion of whose houses has become a common practice?
It can safely "be said that the recent aggression of Israel in terms of the annexation of the Golan Heights is a disastrous consequence of the sinister Camp David accords. For this aggressive regime, having come to an agreement with Egypt and separating it from the front of the liberation forces of Palestine, is trying to annex some other Islamic lands on the pretext of the strategic importance of the Golan Heights in return for the probable withdrawal from Sinai, and also to increase its pressure on the Arab steadfastness front at the head of which stands the heroic nation of Syria which is confronting the Zionist regime face-to-face.
Thus we see that the illegal annexation of the Golan Heights is a means of exerting pressure on the combatant forces of the area. Unfortunately, under the present conditions involving the use of force, the United Nations, which is supposed to enforce the will and the views of the freedom-loving majority of the world's people, is not capable of doing so.
In the Security Council of the United Nations the great Satan cannot even tolerate a mild resolution condemning Israel, whereas, according to the United Nations Charter, the occupation of the land of other nations by force is strongly condemned and considered illegal. And it has become evident that the American positive vote for the conditional resolution of the Security Council in its session of December 1981 concerning the annexation of the Golan Heights and also the American position in regard to the suspension of the strategic co-operation pact between rapacious America and the Zionist regime are in fact nothing but a ridiculous scenario designed to deceive public opinion and insidiously satisfy the conformists. But the true wicked position of America is the one that was manifested in its recent veto in the Security Council. This veto right, as Imam Khomeini put it so well, is worse than the law of the jungle.
Everybody knows that the very existence of the Zionist regime in Palestine has been the work of world imperialism and of this very Organization, whose help we expect in vain today.
Israel's animosity has not been confined only to Palestine or to the Palestinian strugglers. The rationale behind its creation is primarily to disunite the countries of the area in order to provide a base for its infiltration into the whole area. Consequently, today the usurped territory of Palestine is a base for the American Government and a centre for the implementation of its satanic conspiracies. It is from there that America is exercising its intervention in other countries. Thus the Israeli danger threatens the whole Islamic world and, indeed, global peace. Therefore, it is the duty of all Moslems and all peace-loving nations to avert it.
If some countries of the area do not realize the danger inherent in Israeli aggression in general, then they had better know that the present aggression as such is in principle as dangerous and, therefore, tantamount to aggression against all countries. According to a verse from the Koran:
If anyone slew a person, unless it be for murder or for speaking mischief in the land, it would be as if he slew the whole people."
(Maida, verse 35)
As long as the oppressed people of the world do not have an effective reliable authority to which they can refer for the restoration of their usurped rights, any call for the maintenance of "peace" or any invitation to "peaceful negotiation ' is sheer treachery. Hence the only way to survival remains struggle, including the use of force.
At this crucial stage of the history of Islam, the Islamic Republic of Iran, while supporting all its Syrian Moslem brothers without reservation and unconditionally condemning the Zionist decision on the annexation of the Golan Heights, announces from the platform of the United Nations that the principal struggle against the criminal acts of the Zionists whether for the liberation of Palestine, which is of course of great Islamic concern or for the emancipation of other occupied Arab land - is possible only through the unity of the entire forces of all Moslems and the unreserved support of all the true lovers of justice and on the basis of the following principles:
First rejection of all the so-called political solutions proposed by the imperialist and Zionist circles and their allies in the area in order to make the slogan of struggle to the last drop of blood and to the last breath a matter of popular commitment;
Secondly, the resolutions and texts of the United Nations and its related organizations are not to be depended on and to be considered at most as weak political slogans;
Thirdly, employment of oil as a weapon and the embargo on its supply to America and any other country that supports Israel;
Fourthly, the adoption of a revolutionary economic policy and mobilization of all the potential of the area by the Islamic countries against the Zionist regime and its supporters. This measure is to be considered very seriously and implemented effectively;
Fifthly, full preparation for defending the territorial integrity of the Islamic land and. liberating the occupied territories;
Sixthly, comprehensive political, economic, military and moral support of all freedom -loving humanitarian forces for the combatants in the forefront of the battle against Zionist aggression, particularly the Moslem people of Syria, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the struggling people of southern Lebanon, as well as the Arab steadfastness front which has preferred honourable struggle to submissive peace, and
Seventhly, the establishment of a united Islamic front of all Islamic forces under the banner of "The Guards of Al-Quds" for defence against Israeli occupation. The necessity of establishing this front is due to the uniqueness of Al-Quds; which is the first Gheblah for Moslems and is also highly regarded by the revealed religions.
The Islamic Republic of Iran, under the leadership of Imam Khomeini and in accordance with the principles of the Islamic Ummah, is fully prepared to take the first decisive step towards the implementation of this vital plan which concerns the destiny and the future of the entire Ummah and is ready to take action against the infiltration and the intervention of super-Powers and their illegitimates offspring, Israel.
I should like to end my statement by pointing out that the Islamic Revolution of Iran, after its victory over the mercenary regime of the Shah, has swung the country round from a pro-Israeli position and made it a supporter of the Palestinians and all the oppressed people of the world, after eliminating forever the interests of imperialism and Zionism, particularly those of rapacious America, and replaced the representative of the Zionists by the representative of Palestine.
Following the embargo on supplying its oil to America; Israel and the racist regime of South Africa, the Islamic Republic of Iran has become the target of political aggression and propaganda attacks by the press of imperialism and military aggression.
To prevent active participation "by the Moslem forces of Iran on the Palestinian front. America urged the Iraqi regime to attack Iran's borders in the couth and the west. Just as Sadat committed the crime of accepting the Camp David accords and thus prevented Egypt from participating in the liberation of Palestine. Saddam, by attacking Iran and pitting the forces of the two Moslem countries against each other, committed a two fold crime.
In spite of all the difficulties brought upon the Islamic Republic of Iran by the imposed war; Iran will always stand against Israeli aggression in the area. In conformity with this policy, we once again condemn the annexation of the Golan Heights and indeed all Israeli aggression and fully support the position of the Syrian Moslems. We call upon all the representatives of the honourable nations of the world to condemn the Zionist aggression and the American support for it.
The Golan Heights, the Sinai and Palestine shall always remain Islamic Arab territories, and the final victory will belong to the genuine Moslems.
When the billion Moslems of the world return to Islam and regain Islamic Identity, they will deal with all the aggressors accordingly and revive the glory of the early days of Islam. That will be the day when justice prevails.
"0, ye who believe!
If ye will aid /the cause of/ God,
He will aid you, and plant your feet firmly".
Mr. AL-ARRAYAD (Bahrain) (interpretation from Arabic): The fact that the United Nations General Assembly has entrusted the conduct of its ninth special session to Mr. Ismat Kittani is a recognition of the knowledge and the wide experience of the work of the United Nations he acquired during his presidency of the thirty-sixth session.
It gives me pleasure to welcome on behalf of Bahrain the new Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar. We wish him success in his endeavours to serve the cause of international peace and understanding.
On this occasion I cannot fail to pay a tribute to the effective role played by his predecessor, Mr. Kurt Waldheim, in his work with the United Nations in the promotion of world peace and security.
The United Nations General Assembly is meeting in this emergency special session under the "uniting for peace" resolution in order to consider the grave situation produced by Israel's refusal to rescind its decision to annex the occupied Syrian Golan Heights, following the failure of the Security Council to adopt a resolution compelling Israel to comply with the principles of the United Nations and of international law.
Israel's arrogant refusal to comply with Security Council resolution 497 (198l) adopted on 17 December 1981, which called upon it to rescind its decision to annex the Syrian Golan Heights occupied since 1967 is what created the present grave situation now under consideration, with its grave implications for peace and security in the Middle East. Thus today we see the United Nations confronting a grave situation that will jeopardize its prestige and basic principles if the Member States do not confirm their pledge to adhere to the principles of the Charter, especially those concerning the prohibition of the acquisition of territory by force and the respect for the sovereignty of each State over its territory.
The Golan Heights is part and parcel of the Syrian territories occupied by Israel since 1967. It is an Arab Syrian territory, and no State whatsoever has the right to make any decision concerning it save Syria alone, which has sovereignty over it. Hence, Israel's decision to annex the Golan Heights after 14 years of occupation must be considered an act of aggression against Syria which heightens tension in that sensitive part of the world. That is exactly what Israel seeks through its aggressive approach in absorbing the Arab territories one after the other in order to realize the Zionist aim of establishing a Greater Israel in the Arab territories from the Nile to the Euphrates.
Israel annexed Jerusalem, and it then annexed the Syrian Golan Heights. We shall not be surprised to see that aggressive policy persist in the future with the annexation of the West. Bank. the Gaza Strip and southern Lebanon if the United Nations does not take deterrent measures against Israel in accordance with Chapter VII of the Charter.
In its resolution 497 (1981), adopted on 17 December 1980, the Security Council confirmed its total rejection of the Israeli decision. There was unanimity among its members, including the United States of America. The United States s support for that resolution augured well and led us to believe that the United States of America, one of the super-Powers that shoulder the responsibility of maintaining international peace and security, would adopt a balanced position vis-a-vis a clear-cut issue that bears on the fundamental principles of the United Nations and international law. Hence we envisaged the Security Council breaking the cycle of condemnation and denunciation and moving to the phase of practical implementation through resolutions that derived their force from deterrent measures that would compel aggressive Israel to refrain from its aggression.
Most unfortunately, the United States of America, instead of advocating the principles contained in Security Council resolution 497 (l98l), supported the Israeli stand, by opposing the application of just sanctions against Israel, and by vetoing the draft resolution that the Security Council would otherwise have been able to adopt by a majority vote of its members. This situation proved that for the United States, the Israeli aggression outweighs respect for the principles of the United Nations and the interests of world peace, The United States' stand as regards the Jordanian draft resolution in the Security Council is not founded on an acceptable premise or logic. Actually it is contrary to the role of the United States as a member State of the Security Council and one of the super Powers that shoulder the responsibility of maintaining peace and security in the world.
Security Council resolution 497 (198l) afforded Israel a golden opportunity to rescind its decision, return to the right path and commit itself again to the principles of the United Nations, after the international community had unanimously rejected the annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights. Israel's refusal to comply with that resolution constitutes disregard for the will of the Security Council which is the highest international organ entrusted with the maintenance of international peace and security. Israel's breach of the United Nations Charter and its flouting of Security Council and General Assembly resolutions are not new. They date back to the inception of Israel. If we recall the Security Council and General Assembly resolutions throughout the last 30 years, we see scores of denunciations of Israel and its repeated acts of aggression. I cite the following examples: desecration of the Holy Places; the burning of the Al-Aqsa Mosque: excavation in the courtyard of Al-Haram Al-Sharif the practice of terrorism against the Palestinian people: the acquisition of land and territory by force in the West Bank and the occupied Gaza Strip: the demolition of houses while the defenceless Palestinian citizens watch; the changing of the status of the occupied territories, the imposition of its laws on the Palestinian people by force, the establishment of settlements repeated acts of aggression against Lebanon, the attack on the Iraqi nuclear reactor: the implementation of the project to build a canal linking the Mediterranean to the Dead Sea, and other acts of aggression that constitute a continuous and cynical defiance of the United Nations Charter and its resolutions, as well as a clear breach of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, which prohibits the effecting of geographical and demographic changes in the territories under occupation.
Israel's resolution to annex the Golan Heights reconfirms beyond doubt what we have stated before this Assembly on previous occasions- that Israel is nothing but a colonialist, expansionist force that thrives on aggression and seeks to undermine peace and security in the area in order to achieve its greedy expansionist aims at the expense of the Arab Islamic countries. What Israel pays lip-service to us as regards its intentions concerning peace and making peace with the States in the area, is nothing but a smoke-screen that is meant to hide the true face of Israel that is revealed by its repeated, acts of aggression. Israel may deceive the international community for some time, but it cannot deceive it for ever. We shall not be far from the truth if we say that Israel, which always feigned a desire for peace, will no longer be able to deceive the international community and falsify the facts because international public opinion has become aware of its designs and its greed for expansionism, the last example of which was its decision to annex the Golan Heights.
The State of Bahrain, which deplored and denounced, as it still does, the Israeli act of aggression against Syria embodied in its decision to annex the Golan Heights, appeals to the international community represented in this Assembly to hasten to take the necessary steps and measures against Israel, including the suspension of its membership in the United Nations. The State of Bahrain, proceeding from the -premise of its responsibility as a Member of this Organization, declares its readiness to work with the other peace-loving nations in order to find a just comprehensive and permanent settlement of the Middle East problem in accordance with the United Nations resolutions that call for the withdrawal of Israel from all the occupied territories, as well as the recovery of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination of its rights to its territory and to nationhood. We hope that the General Assembly will be able to adopt effective resolutions to deal with the grave situation for which this session lies been convened to that international peace and security may be maintained in the Middle East.
Mr. KAMAHDA WAKAMANDA (Zaire) (interpretation from French): Madame President, I should first like to express to Mr. Ismat Kittanib through you; my pleasure at seeing him preside over the work of the ninth emergency special session of the General Assembly on the situation in the occupied Arab territories. The experience and talent which he displayed throughout the proceedings of the thirty- sixth session of the General Assembly guarantee us success in our present deliberations.
Next I should like to reiterate to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, my warm congratulations on his election and assure him of our full collaboration throughout his term of office.
Finally, I should like to pay a tribute to the remarkable work done by Mr. Kurt Waldheim when he was Secretary-General, particularly in the field of the preservation of international peace and security.
It is highly significant that the ninth emergency special session of the General Assembly, today, and the Security Council, since December 1981, have been considering under the heading "The situation in the occupied Arab territories", the situation created by the Israeli decision to extend its laws, jurisdiction and administration to the occupied Syrian Golan Heights. In point of fact the question of the annexation of the Syrian Golan Heights comes within the context of a broader dispute which pits Arab against Jew over the partition of Palestine.
In agreeing to consider this problem under the heading of "The situation in the occupied Arab territories", although the Permanent Represent of Syria in his letter S/14791 of 14 December 1981 requested the Security Council to consider only the decision by the Israeli Government to apply Israeli legislation in the occupied territory of the Golan Heights, the Security Council first, and then the General Assembly, quite properly sought to draw the attention of Member States and of the entire international community to the various aspects or parameters of this conflict and to its global nature, with a view to seeking a global solution which would be both just and lasting.
I am saying that there are a number of parameters in the Middle East conflict. First of all, there is a Palestinian people deprived of its lands, of its homeland, of its goods and property, in search of a national home of a State wherein it can organize a sovereign and independent existence aimed at prosperity and progress. This people understandably feels that a deep injustice has been committed against it, for yesterday it had a homeland, sovereignty, goods and property, and it is quite properly asking in the name of what principle or what interest it has been divested - we can even say deprived of everything - to be reduced to the status of refugee and eternal exile.
Then there is the Jewish people, which legitimately believes it has the right to exist as a nation which deeply feels that the international community was right to recognize its needs and its claims by granting it the State of Israel, but which, at the same time, lives with the constant haunting memory of destruction and feels that its neighbours - in this case the Arab States do not want it to exist a.s a State, refuse to recognize it and are working towards destroying its existence.
Finally, there are the peoples and Arab States of the region which, rightly or wrongly, feel that they have been deprived of their historical rights and that the creation of the State of Israel was an injustice committed against them, because the Jewish problem was settled to the detriment of their obvious interests - territorial and others and to a certain extent at their expense.
It is those parameters - which clearly go beyond the purely juridical context to become a problem at once highly political and highly moral and humanitarian in character - that have given rise to all the excesses that have been quite properly deplored in that region, and which threaten international peace and security not only in the region but throughout the world. There is thus a problem of outright mistrust among all the parties to the conflict, a problem which the United Nations and the international community must resolve. That means that we must urgently seek a comprehensive solution which is both just and lasting for the conflict in the Middle East.
We are meeting here prompted by a desire to unite for the maintenance of peace. And the first tiro purposes of the United Rations, as set forth in the Charter, are:
"To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
"To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determinations of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace. That is to say that a comprehensive, just and durable solution to the conflict in the Middle East must be sought by peaceful means in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. It is in this spirit that the Security Council, in its resolution 242 (1967), set down the guiding principles for seeking a peaceful comprehensive solution which is both just and lasting to this conflict and, under the terms of resolution 338 (1973), called upon all parties to the conflict to immediately to undertake appropriate negotiations which should, in short, centre around the three parameters that I outlined earlier.
To date, the parties to the Middle East conflict, both Arabs and Jews, seem to have failed in both the letter and the spirit of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). The State of Israel, contrary to the pertinent stipulations of the Charter and to the pertinent resolutions of the United Nations, is stepping up its challenges to the international community and. thinking to protect what it perceives to be its vital interest, is resorting to all possible means - even those contrary to the Charter of the United Nations -despite the reprobation of the entire international community.
The annexation of the Holy City of Jerusalem, under international status, the annexation of the Golan Heights, the refusal to adhere to multinational negotiations integrating all aspects of the problem that is, the three parameters to which I referred at the beginning of my statement - and in particular the Palestinian dimension, are not attitudes likely to further or contribute to the search for a solution by peaceful means or by negotiation that would result in a comprehensive, just and lasting solution to the conflict in the Middle East.
The intransigence of the Arab side in refusing to recognize the State of Israel's right to exist and in rejecting Security Council resolution 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), which paradoxically are today the very same resolutions to which the international community refers in order to declare null and void the Israeli decision to annex the Syrian Golan Heights is also not an attitude likely to facilitate by peaceful means or negotiations the search for a comprehensive just end lasting solution to the Middle East conflict.
Thus, undoubtedly for different reasons and from quite different approaches the impression exists that the parties to the Middle East conflict - both Israel end the Arab parties - are behaving as if they wished to prolong the Middle East conflict, unlike the overwhelming majority of the members of the international community, who would like an end to be put as quickly as possible - to a conflict which has a burdensome impact on international relations ana the prolongation of which undoubted threatens peace, security and. international co-operation.
In the light of this situation, there are only two possible paths to follow if stalemate is to be ended: first, the path of war with its concomitant suffering and accumulated frustrations and secondly the peaceful path of negotiation.
Now, the Charter of the United Nations to which we all freely acceded. prohibits recourse to war and calls for the settlement of international disputes through peaceful means and recommends that this be the only way to settle disputes taking into account the other principles of the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States of the world. Furthermore, war breeds war. And everyone knows that it was when they vanquished almighty Nazi Germany that the victors first became fully aware of their imperial vocation. War is the beginning of a cycle, and no one can say where or when it will stop. The party that capitulates today is not necessarily admitting to being vanquished and victory does not necessarily bring tranquility, for victory is not the same thing as peace.
This means that the problem that we are facing here is that of unconditional and loyal adherence to the principles purposes and objectives of the United Nations Charter. The possible questioning of such adherence would cast doubt on the very existence or appropriateness of the existence of the United Nations, which was created precisely in order to prevent and deal with situations of the type now prevailing in the Middle East, because they carry the obvious seeds of war. Apart from the fact that the prolongation of the Middle East conflict brings us closer each day to a generalized war the scope and consequences of which we should all be able to gauge, with every passing day it also risks calling into question the existence of the United Nations.
This is the problem in all its complexity and seriousness. The United Nations will not survive a third world war nor will it survive the proliferation of geographically localized wars which are global in terms of the interests they jeopardise.
We are meeting here in order to maintain peace. This means that through, effective and. concrete measures, through a just and lasting solution to the conflict in the middle East, we should, at the same time seek to safeguard the existence of the United Nations and to re-establish peace throughout the world.
More and more often, certain States Members of the United Nations believe that they can settle major problems of common interest and situations which might threaten international peace and security outside the framework of the United Nations, because the United. Rations, its democratic procedures, its aims and its principles stand in the way of promoting the interests to which they cling and which they believe they must defend by all possible means. It is primarily the large countries and. major Powers that initiated this change, because the democratic dynamics of the United Nations and the democratization of international relations implied, therein has struck a hard, blow against the privileges which they enjoyed and which they today consider to be sacrosanct acquisitions.
We should also deplore the fact that certain medium-sized and small nations -whose legitimate vital interests would be placed in serious jeopardy, even denied, without the existence of the United Nations and the principles of international law which it has continued to elaborate for nearly 40 years -follow in the footsteps of the great Powers to weaken or even, consciously or unconsciously, to work for the destruction of the United Nations. We should resist the temptation to seek to settle the great problems of common interest or international concern outside the United Nations. All the initiatives, all the massive efforts aimed at leading us to that result should be discouraged: the international community should consider it its duty not to endorse them.
There is no doubt that without the United Nations Israel would not exist as it exists today. It is paradoxical therefore that a State which owes its existence to the United Nations can defy it with such arrogance. Like all the other States of the third world, the Arab States should, for obvious reasons, work to strengthen the United Nations and international law, because the balance of strength between the developed industrialized world and us is, inevitably, not in our favour in a very large number of areas, especially in the area, of military strength.
Thus, it is common sense that all the parties to the Middle East conflict should adhere to the spirit of peace and negotiation, so as not to assume the responsibility before history for the catastrophic consequences of their folly and intransigence, consequences which would be felt by all mankind.
Hg,s the United Nations regressed? Have we found that with the stress of time the principles, purposes and objectives of the United Nations no longer serve to guarantee and safeguard the world's interests, the legitimate interests of all the nations of the world, the interests of peace, security and trusting co-operation? Or is it the States themselves which are no longer able to adapt to the democratic dynamism of the United Nations?
For our part, we believe that the world Organization has not regressed, and that today more than ever it is the dynamic expression of collective reason, of the virtues of collective wisdom in the face of major problems of international concern;, and that it is more than ever at the service of mankind - and of all mankind,
At the seventh emergency special session of the General Assembly devoted to the question of Palestine, we stated that in the Middle East the intransigent attitude of the principal parties could be greatly changed, could become more moderate and considered, if the great Powers were truly to adhere to the spirit of peace and make an honest, objective contribution; if they were truly sensitive to violations of human rights and of all the rights of the Palestinians; and if they were to give up all their calculated designs for power, their irrelevant selfish rivalries in that region, and if they were no longer to pursue designs based on the spirit of and the struggle for hegemony. For it is not in that way that we can all build a world of peace. Yes, it is peace which is really at stake here, and that seems to hinder or frustrate the designs of certain Members of the United Nations.
It is unquestionably appropriate to mention the terms of General Assembly resolution 190 (III), which recalls the declarations made at Yalta on 11 February 1945 by Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin, the terms of the Moscow Agreements of 24 December 1945 and those of the Washington Declaration of 1 January 1942. On 11 February 1945 at Yalta, Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin declared, inter alia, as follows:
'"(We) reaffirm our faith in the principles of the Atlantic Charter, our pledge in the Declaration by the United Nations, and our determination to build in co-operation with other peace-loving nations a world order under law, dedicated to peace, security and the general well-being....
'"Only with continuing and growing co-operation and with understanding among our three countries, and among all the peace-loving nations, can the highest aspiration of humanity be realized - a secure and lasting peace which will, in the words of the Atlantic Charter 'Afford assurance that all the men in all the lands may live out their lives in freedom from fear and want"'." (resolution 190 (III), para. l)
At its third session, the General Assembly endorsed that declaration and expressed its conviction that the major allied Powers would adjust their policies to the spirit of these declarations, and recommended that they should redouble their efforts, in a spirit of solidarity and mutual understanding, to secure in the briefest possible time the final settlement of the war and the conclusion of all the peace settlements.
In our view, that appeal made to the great Powers to redouble their efforts to reconcile their disagreements and to establish a lasting peace, an appeal made on 3 November 1948, is just as valid today in 1982 in connexion with the Middle East crisis and with many other crises which threaten international peace and security.
We say that the great Powers would be totally departing from the spirit and letter of resolution 190 (III) and from all their commitments if they were to give the impression that they wished to make use of the disputes that arise in various quarters in order to back up their ambitions to power and to settle accounts among themselves in the name of the balance of power, without any concern for the consequences of those situations for the vital interests of the peoples concerned. The sufferings, problems or difficulties of any people or State whatever should not be used as a pretext for strengthening imperialist aspirations.
In its resolution 290 (IV) regarding the essentials of peace, the General Assembly
"Declares that the Charter of the United Nations, the most solemn pact of peace in history, lays down basic principles necessary for an enduring peace: that disregard of these principles is primarily responsible for the continuance of international tension and that it is urgently necessary for all Members to act in accordance with these principles in the spirit of co-operation on which the United Nations was founded; Calls upon every nation
"To refrain from threatening or using force contrary to the Charter;
"To carry out in good faith its international agreements;
"To afford all United Nations bodies full co-operation and free access in the performance of the tasks assigned to them under the Charter:
"To participate fully in all the work of the United Nations- /and/
"To settle international disputes by peaceful means and to co-operate in supporting United Nations efforts to resolve outstanding problems". (resolution 290 (IV), passim.)
As we have already had the opportunity to state in the Security Council, the plain and simple rescission of the illegal annexation measure adopted by the Knesset would be a demonstration to the whole world of the unconditional attachment claimed by Israel to a negotiated settlement of the conflict.
Furthermore, in the spirit of Security Council resolution 497 (l98l), and to give effect to that resolution which until now has served as the legal basis and as the authority for invalidating the Israeli annexation decision, the General Assembly should declare that all actions taken by Israel to give effect to that decision are illegal and invalid, and should in consequence call upon Member States to refrain from any action which could imply any recognition or support, on their part, of the Israeli decision to annex the Syrian Golan Heights.
At the same time, and above and beyond any solution to the problem under discussion, the General Assembly should consider the possibility of initiating new efforts towards an over-all just and lasting settlement of the crisis, for the question before us today is, in the final analysis, only a single aspect, a single manifestation of the basic problem. Numerous Security Council resolutions, including resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 476 (1900) and 478 (1980), and General Assembly resolutions, including resolutions l8l (II), 194 (lll) and ES-7/2, establish the objective foundations for a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East region.
We reaffirm that all the States of the region have the right to existence and to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries. We reaffirm our total commitment to the principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force or by war.
We further say that Israel should withdraw from all the Arab territories occupied in 1967 and that the States Members of this Organization should be unanimous in their rejection of all steps aimed at altering the status of the Arab territories occupied by Israel as a result of the 1967 war.
But to achieve something useful and constructive, the debate at this ninth Emergency special session of the General Assembly must be consummated by the adoption of a resolution centred on those elements, taking into account the three parameters I set forth at the beginning of my statement, and which, through the solution of the question of the annexation of the Golan, aims at a comprehensive settlement of the problem in accordance with Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) and with the other relevant resolutions of the General Assembly, a settlement which should also incorporate the Palestinian issue.
Mr. D'ESCOTO BROCKMANN (Nicaragua) (interpretation from Spanish) : I should first of all like to reiterate my congratulations to the President and to convey to the Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, how gratified my country in to see him, a Latin American and a representative of a brother non-aligned country, heading the Secretariat of our Organization a man whose commitment to the cause of peace and justice has been amply proved.
Nicaragua decided to take part in this debate and to be represented at the highest ministerial level because of our solidarity with the people and Government of the Syrian Arab Republic, whose sovereignty is under attack by the brutal and illegal Israeli decision to annex the already illegally occupied Golan Heights. The principles which guided the Nicaraguan people in its struggle for liberation and which today guide our revolutionary spirit do not allow its Revolutionary Government to remain insensitive in the face of acts that affect the territorial integrity and the right to self-determination of any people.
The annexation of the Golan Heights is all the more serious and alarming because it is a case in which force is used in open violation of the most basic principles of the United Nations Charter and because that violation was not met with the necessary and well-deserved response from the Security Council. When the Israeli annexation took place, making opportunistic use of the fact that the eyes of the world were directed elsewhere in the world. Nicaragua noted with satisfaction the unanimous resolution declaring that Israel's decision was null and void and without effect in international law. At the same time, the Council called for the decision to be rescinded forthwith: or it would meet urgently to consider taking appropriate measures.
Israel's reply could not have been more arrogant or intransigent when it rejected outright the decision and even the authority, of the Council in flagrant disregard of its own obligations as a, Member State under the United Nations Charter. Israel's membership should therefore be questioned in the light of its already intolerable expansionist practices, its contempt for United Nations resolutions, its crimes against the Arab nation, as recently evidenced by the unjustified attack on Baghdad's nuclear reactor, its ruthless attacks on civilian centres in Lebanon and its persistent trampling on the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. And going beyond the Arab world, Israel's aggressive policy makes its tentacles felt in support of South Africa and of the Central American dictatorships which massacre their own civilians with Israeli equipment as was the case in Nicaragua under Somoza's dictatorship.
When the Security Council met again, my delegation cherished the hope that its commitment to the principles of justice-, peace and international security, already proved in resolution 497 (1981), would once again be shown by the adoption of concrete provisions in defence of international legality. In the course of the debate in the Security Council, the overwhelming majority of statements stressed the fact that the Council should discharge its responsibility and adopt the measures provided for in the Charter. It was a question not only of chastising but also of deterring, since impunity would encourage fresh Israeli acts of annexation and aggression. As we stated in the Council. Nicaragua, a country in a region in turmoil because of foreign interference, cannot remain indifferent to the possibility of our Organization's being unable to withstand the illegal use of force, or to the fact that an attempt is also being made in our region - Central America and the Caribbean - to impose the law of the jungle.
As a result of the United States veto, the Council was unable to discharge its primary responsibility. The draft resolution that was vetoed did not even provide for decisive measures against Israel to boot. Far from bringing its considerable influence on Israel to bear in order to persuade it to abide by resolution 497 (1981), the United States further reaffirmed its alliance with Israel and offered new assurances. Such assurances cannot be divorced from statements made by Israeli-officials to The New York Times that Israel has not the slightest intention of returning the Golan Heights nor of granting sovereignty to the Palestinians of the West Bank.
No one can deny that the world is today witnessing not only a violation of the inalienable rights of peoples and of the sovereignty of countries, but also a serious trend on the part of the aggressors and their allies to punish, through the use or threat of force, those nations which stand shoulder to shoulder with the victims of outrage in the Middle East and southern Africa and in Central America. Today we are denouncing Israel's aggressive reply to Syria, as we did yesterday in the case of Iraq and Lebanon, as we may tomorrow be denouncing its acts of aggression against Nicaragua or against Angola, given our commitment to the cause of the legitimate independence of peoples fighting against oppressive tyranny or for the attainment of self-determination. Nations which do not keep silent in the face of affronts to human dignity and which come to the United Nations counting on the principles of the Charter and the norms that should govern relations among States are Made the victims, Our Organization cannot allow the policy of force to replace that of international law.
International law, like human rights, cannot be subordinated to dangerous and ridiculously simplistic notions of East-West confrontation - simplistic because of the attempt to ignore the concrete dimensions and the aspirations to freedom which motivate the struggles of peoples; dangerous because the defence of so-called vital interests and strategic alliances, he they in the Middle East or in Central America, endanger international peace and security.
The time has come for Washington to concede that neither its weapons nor its dollars given to repressive regimes - such as Israel or El Salvador - will bring peace to the Middle East or to Central America, quite the contrary, encouraging aggressors or regressive regimes merely perpetuates insecurity and tension.
The time has come for the United Nations to adopt all practical and necessary measures to ensure peace and stability and to safeguard the very authority of the principles embodied in the Charter.
Mr. BARTLETT (Jamaica): The delegation of Jamaica congratulates Ambassador Kittani on the smooth and efficient manner in which the thirty-sixth session of the General Assembly has been conducted. We are most fortunate to have the benefit of his experience and skill to guide the proceedings of this ninth emergency special session of the General Assembly.
My delegation extends its warm congratulations to the newly appointed Secretary-General, Mr, Javier Perez de Cuellar. His outstanding talents and many years of involvement with the United Nations give us every reason to expect that he will make a major contribution to the achievement of peace and of world economic and social development.
His predecessor, Mr. Kurt Waldheim, has earned our praise and gratitude for his accomplishments over the past 10 years of dedicated service to the Organization.
One area to which he devoted much time and energy is the Middle East, which continues to pose complex and formidable challenges for his successor. The new development in the situation which has led to the convening of this emergency special session raises issues of primary importance to all of us. The territorial integrity of States, the duty of States to respect international "boundaries and the prohibition of the use of force are rules and principles of fundamental importance to the international political and legal order. They are enshrined in the Charter as the foundations on which nations, large and small, strong, and weak, may coexist in peace and security.
The decision taken by the Israeli Government on 14 December runs counter to those principles. Legislation was enacted by the Israeli Knesset imposing Israeli laws, jurisdiction and administration in the occupied Golan Heights. This is tantamount to annexation of the territory which belongs to the Syrian Arab Republic. This action is a clear and flagrant violation of international law. It runs counter to the provisions of the Charter, to which Israel as a Member State is committed. It is also not possible to reconcile this action with Israel's commitment to resolution 242 (1967) which, inter alia, reaffirmed the principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and consequently called for the withdrawal of Israel from the occupied Arab territories.
That act of annexation is not only illegal but has also dangerously increased the level of tension in the region and creates yet another obstacle to the movement towards peace. It raises even higher the barrier between the Arab States and Israel and intensifies the deep-rooted animosities and grievances which lie at the source of the conflict in the region. Peace in the Middle East requires a mutual accommodation and recognition of the rights of each party. Unilateral actions in violation of the territorial rights of another State can hardly help to create a climate of confidence conducive to accommodation and compromise.
Jamaica therefore urges the Government of Israel to rescind the law of 14 December and to refrain from similar measures affecting the status of the occupied Arab territories. Jamaica, for its part, will not recognize Israeli action as having any legal validity and we will continue to regard the occupied Golan Heights as being subject to the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 and of Security Council resolution 242 (1967).
A solution to the problems of the Middle East requires courageous statesmanship, it requires a commitment to legality and to the peaceful settlement of disputes through negotiations. The leaders of the States of the Middle East must find a way to reach a comprehensive settlement which will safeguard the territorial integrity of the States in the region, implement the rights of the Palestinians, and ensure that all States in the region, including Israel, can exist in peace and security within their recognized boundaries.
Mr. VELLOSO (Brazil): Brazil has always considered Israel's withdrawal from the occupied Arab territories, including the Golan Heights, as an essential prerequisite for a peaceful settlement in the Middle East. It is therefore with particular distress that we join in the universal attitude of reproof which has followed Israel's illegal annexation of yet another territory occupied by force. We have already shown our disapproval of this act by supporting General Assembly resolution 36/226 B, which supplemented the unanimous condemnation voiced through Security Council resolution 497 (l98l). Israel ;s persistent violation of Security Council and General Assembly resolutions, including resolution 487 (l98l), however, has led nations to convene once again in order to express their unequivocal position against a trend which must be reversed, lest the prospects for a just, lasting and comprehensive solution for the Middle East be irrevocably jeopardized.
By acting once again outside the framework of international law. Israel has further contributed to intensifying tensions in that convulsed region. The world community cannot but deplore such action, for not only does it violate resolutions which have come to be accepted as the very basis for a peaceful settlement in the Middle East but it also reveals a disturbing disrespect for the principles upon which peace among nations must necessarily be founded. We, Members of the United Nations, are bound to reaffirm our commitment to Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), as well as our respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of States, for the principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force and for the peaceful settlement of disputes among nations.
It is our belief, nevertheless, that unfortunately the recent past has afforded us too many occasions for repetitious displays of our commitment to the principles on which our Organization is based. In 1980 East Jerusalem was illegally annexed, in spite of the warning contained in Security Council resolution 476 (1980) intended to prevent Israel from carrying out its project. Last year Israeli aircraft bombed an Iraqi nuclear research station as well as hundreds of innocent civilians in Beirut and southern Lebanon. This latest item in this dismal series of violations of international law, carried out in the face of unconditional condemnation throughout the world, defies world opinion which must again ask itself the question: Will it be the last time?
It has been stated before by my delegation that those actions can only serve the purpose of further damaging the reputation of their perpetrators. A lasting peace for the Middle East must necessarily be sought through implementation of Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 330 (1973). It must include the withdrawal of the occupying forces from Arab territory, the recognition of the rights of the Palestinian people to return to Palestine, as well as their right to self-determination, independence and sovereignty, the participation of the Palestine Liberation Organization in the peace negotiations and the right of existence for all States in the region within recognized boundaries. The Brazilian Government deems it imperative that those points be observed in connexion with the Middle East situation. It goes without saying, however, that acts of aggression such as the one under consideration must come to an end before an accepted basis for a settlement may be found.
Mr. AL-ALI (Iraq) (interpretation from Arabic): We are convened here today in a special emergency session of the General Assembly to reconsider one of the gravest issues connected with the explosive situation in the Middle East, namely the new act of Zionist aggression against Syria. The delegation of Iraq, as it participates in this debate, is even more aware of its gravity and dimensions and is much more committed to fulfilling, its national responsibilities in this debate because it concerns the annexation of a part of the territory of a sovereign Arab State, that is, Syria- with which we have links of common history and a common fate.
The Arab nation, like all friendly States and those that advocate right and justice everywhere in the world-, has been able, to reveal and expose the falsehoods of the Zionist entity and to realize the true meaning of its system as an expansionist and racist entity whose policy embodies racism and expansionism as demonstrated by its persistent occupation of the territories of the Arab nation and its non-recognition of the national and legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, who were expelled from their territory, who have become uprooted and persecuted, who live as refugees and whose lands have been occupied. The whole world has become aware of the persistence of the Zionist entity in implementing its designs to Judaize Jerusalem, to annex it to the racist and expansionist entity and to consider it as its eternal capital.
The decision of the Zionist Knesset to that effect is an example of the violation of international law and legality by the Zionists. It left no room for doubt that the Zionist entity rejects the principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of the territory of others by force.
On 14 December 1981, the Zionist authorities committed another act in the series of aggressive and expansionist acts against one of the Arab States, when it declared the annexation of the occupied Golan Heights and imposed its internal laws on Syrian citizens in defiance of international public opinion and the principles of international law, as well as the United Nations Charter and the Geneva Conventions. That was an act which called for the strongest condemnation and denunciation on the part of the international community.
The aggressive and expansionist policy of the Zionist invaders is no longer something which is unknown to the States of the world, because the history of that entity is nothing but a series of wars and acts of aggression which have been repeatedly waged by it from the time it was established. The history of this international Organization, with its numerous resolutions over a period of more than a third of a century offers clear evidence of that. The continuous aggression practised by Israel against the Arab States has revealed to the world the falsehood of the security theory which Israel has been repeating as a cover in order to perpetrate more aggressive and expansionist acts at the expense of others and to establish settlements throughout the occupied Arab territories.
It has now become clear to the States of the world that the concept of Israeli security, as it has been put forward, does not mean anything else than more aggression more occupation and more expansion. That fact has been proved by the many acts committed by Israel from the time of its establishment to the present.
On 14 December 1981, the Government of the Zionists committed a flagrant, grave and new act of aggression by its decision to annex the Syrian Golan Heights and by imposing its laws, jurisdiction and administration thus adding another crime to its record which already abounds in crimes.
That action met with strong denunciation on the part of the Governments and peoples of the world. It also demonstrated the persistence of the Zionist entity in defying the human conscience and in flouting international treaties and laws, as well as the United Nations Charter.
Just three days after the aggressive act of the Zionists to annex the Golan Heights. the Security Council unanimously adopted resolution 497 (1981) which denounced. Israelis annexation of the Golan Heights and declared it null and void. It also called on Israel to rescind forthwith its decision. In operative paragraph 4 the resolution stated, that, in the event of non-compliance by Israel, the Security Council would meet to consider taking appropriate measures in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.
In the light of our knowledge of the expansionist designs of the Zionist entity and our lone experience of its aggressive practices, it has been crystal clear to us from the beginning that the occupation authorities, which are well versed in aggression and expansion, crazed by arrogance and false pride and given to flouting the international community and its resolutions, will never heed the unanimous call of the Security Council.
Therefore it came as no surprise to us when that regime's representative said that Israel could not and would not comply with that resolution. This brazenness in defying the international community is not surprising to those who are well aware of the true nature of the Zionist entity - characteristic of it since its inception which is apparent from its occupation of lands its expelling of indigenous inhabitants and its persistence in annexing the territories of others by force.
It behoves me to underscore here that this entity was in fact created as the end-result of a greater conspiracy planned by the Zionist movement. This design was carried out through the support and alliance of the forces of international colonialism. Foremost among them was the United States of America; which thereby secured bases as a bridgehead for aggression against the Arab nation in order to impose its hegemony and influence on the Arab nation and in order to ensure the continued looting of the riches of the area for the take of Western interest in the area.
The United States of America has thus supplied this entity with all manner of economic military and political support, built in it an arsenal of sophisticated American weaponry and encouraged it to wage repeated acts of aggression against the Arab nation and the Palestinian people. The United States of America has always been careful to maintain its alliance with the Zionist entity throughout its history which abounds In acts of aggression and expansion. The United States has developed this alliance through various forms of escalation, culminating in the strategic accord between the two parties. This accord was in the first place, aimed at encouraging Israel to persist in its occupation of Arab territories including Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, in addition to its usurpation of the national rights of the Palestinian people. This accord was also aimed at inciting it to launch criminal aggressive raids against Lebanon and to smash the roofs over the heads of defenceless citizens and undermine the economic and cultural institutions in Lebanon, to attack the non-military nuclear installations in Iraq and to violate Iraqi, Saudi Arabian and Jordanian air-space on numerous occasions without any scruples of international law or fear of sanctions that might be imposed by the Security Council because of Americans use of the right of veto in support of Israel.
Pursuant to Security Council resolution 497 (l98l), when the Council was obliged to meet again it had another specific task: to consider the measures to be taken against the Zionist entity because of its disregard of and cynicism concerning the resolution of the Security Council that had been adopted unanimously. Once again the Council heard the statements of members of the Council as well as representatives of a large number cf other States of the world. Most of these statements were unanimous in calling on the United Nations Security Council to discharge its responsibilities with regard to the Israeli aggressive act and adopt the necessary sanctions. In accordance with the United Nations Charter and in order to maintain the rule of international law and the application of the Charter, the Security Council met on 20 January 1982 and voted on a draft resolution introduced by the representative of Jordan. Despite the fact that that draft resolution, contained in document S/l4832/Rev.l, was not sufficient because it did not contain the necessary measures against Israel, the United States of America resorted to exercising its veto against it.
By using its veto against an international draft resolution supporting the just rights of the Arabs and directed against the Zionist entity, reproving it and exposing its immoral conduct and aggressive methods - an entity which considers Washington its main supporter - the United States shirked its responsibility and commitments as a great Power called upon to maintain international peace and not to threaten that peace through its lavish support for Israel manifested in its explicit opposition to any attempt on the part of the international community to punish Israel. The United States proved in practice something which discredited its claims that it cherishes the maintenance of international peace. The United States acts in accordance with its colonial interests and the interests of its ally, Israel. It flouted international peace and, by using its right of veto against the draft resolution favouring the Arab cause, proved that it aids and abets everything that threatens peace in the world. The right of veto which was granted to the United States as a major Power called upon to work for peace has been used in contravention of the principles of the Charter and international law. This was also in contravention of many American laws and regulations-, especially in cases where a sovereign State is subject to a flagrant violation such as that to which Syria has been subjected, by the Zionist entity an act of aggression.
The protection given to Israel by the United States of America was not only a harsh blow against an Arab State but also a grave precedent causing the Security Council to deny the legitimate demands of peoples subject to acts of aggression and discouraging them from coming to this Organization in future in order to seek effective measures capable of stopping the aggressor.
The American veto has once more proved the duplicity of the suspension of the strategic alliance between the United States of America and the Zionist entity, and Mrs, Kirkpatrick's voice was the only one raised in opposition in the Council - one more indication among hundreds confirming the unbreakable organic link between the interests of the United States of America and those of the Zionist entity., and this link needs no legal endorsement in the form of a treaty of "strategic alliance" because the unlimited, assistance given to the Zionist entity by the United. States of America in many vital areas is much more long lasting and real than any treaty or convention that might be concluded between the two parties.
The United States of America directs its policy against the principles and aspirations of peoples. We have seen its attempts to discourage the just struggle of the peoples of Africa against racism, as well as its negative positions concerning the Namibian cause, and the racist acts of aggression of the South African regime against the people and Government of Angola.
Its aggressive policy reached a peak recently in its protecting of the Zionist entity from the application of the principles of the Charter in order to deter it from persisting in its aggression against Syria and the other Arab States.
As to the attempts of the American administration to convince some quarters that it does not approve of Israel's aggressive policy against the Arab countries, they are miserable efforts which can no longer convince even those who resort to them.
All decisions announced by the American administration after the attack on the nuclear reactor in Iraq and the annexation of the Golan Heights and its pretence that it would not deliver military aircraft, and would suspend the strategic agreement are nothing but a smokescreen, and we shall soon see the United States again supporting Israel, and to a greater extent than before.
The Arab States have for some time been the target of an aggressive and virulent design planned in the corridors of the White House with unusual specificity and aimed at dismembering the Arab world and weakening it preparatory to occupying it and again dominating it. As is well known, the tools for carrying out that design are the two racist regimes in Tel-Aviv and Teheran. Israel commits acts of aggression against the neighbouring countries and threatens them with aggression every day. It conspires against them and endeavours to annex their territories to its racist entity., and we see the Teheran Government playing the same role, committing acts of aggression against Iraq and Kuwait, conspiring against Bahrain and Yemen and constantly threatening those countries with aggression and occupation.
We see Israel declaring that the West Bank, Gaza and Jerusalem, as well as the Golan Heights, are Israeli territories. We see the Government of Iran claiming that Baghdad, Kuwait, Bahrain and all the land as far as Aden are Persian and we see Israel claiming that its land extends from the Nile to the Euphrates, and the Teheran Government claiming that its territories extend from Baghdad to Aden.
Proceeding from this assistance, support and solidarity and the agreement on the distribution of roles between them in the implementation of the imperialist American designs, they have, so to speak, concluded an alliance. We have learned from a number of sources that Israel has established an air bridge in order to send military hardware from Tel-Aviv to Teheran, using certain foreign airports, especially Larnaca Airport in Cyprus, with a view to encouraging Iran to continue its aggression against Iraq or to weaken the pressure exerted on the forces of the devilish charlatan Khomeini by the Iraqi troops in the performance of their duty to repel aggression and defend Iraq's sovereignty and national dignity. This is all confirmed by the incident of the Argentinian aircraft that crashed in Soviet territory; the international press agencies, including Cypriot and international newspapers; and the confessions of Hashemy Rafasanjani, the head of what is called the Advisory Council of Iran. In addition to this, Mr. Khalid Al-Hassan a member of the Central Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization, on 23 December 1981 told the newspaper Al Watan that all the information published in the international press concerning co-operation in arms between Teheran and Tel-Aviv was true. He denounced the Iranian plans for sabotage in Bahrain and said that had the conspiracy been a success, its consequences would not have been confined to Bahrain.
Here we see Israel deciding to annex the Syrian Golan Heights to its racist entity after an occupation lasting l4 years, and the Teheran Government declaring that the Iraqi territories in Saif Sad, Zain al-Qos, Shatt al-Arab and the three Arab islands Tonb al-Kubra, Tonb al-Sughra and Abu Musa are Persian territories -after having been occupied by Iran by force and aggression. And we see the representative of Israel, which commits acts of aggression against the Arab States and wages wars in full view of the world, attempting to convince everyone that the aggressor is the Arab States, just as the leaders of Iran do. For after those leaders had prepared for aggression by every means and used all their official mass media to incite to sabotage against Iraq, after they had trained a fair number of Iranians to participate in acts of sabotage against Iraqi educational and industrial institutions - and "to that should be added the continual calls for export of the revolution - a revolution of ignorance, backwardness and regression - to Iraq, and lastly, after they had started to bomb the cities on the boundaries of Iraq, such as Khankin and Aenaft-Khana, Mandaly and Zurbatieh, as well as the economic installation in the city of Basra, and had declared their intention to occupy Baghdad; we see their representative coming to the General Assembly with more falsehoods and lying stories, trying to convince the world that Iraq is the aggressor. And today the Foreign Minister of Iran comes to the United Nations, not to defend Arab rights but because he is an ally of Israel and a main party to the American designs, which are inimical to the Arab nation. Furthermore, he has come in order to return a favour granted by his ally Yehuda Blum, who has exploited this international forum more than once to defend the aggressive Persian policy against Iraq and to denounce imagined Iraqi acts of aggression against Iran.
The Foreign Minister of Iran came here in an attempt to divert attention from the main subject of which we are seized today, which is of major importance and which is in the forefront of our minds since it has a bearing not only on the sovereignty and independence of Syria, but on the national sovereignty of all the Arab States. However, the Foreign Minister of Iran failed to realize that the whole world is aware of all these facts and of the unholy alliance between Tel Aviv and Teheran. The world is also well aware, through the events that took place and the documents, that both serve imperialist interests in the area.
The Iraqi Republic, which has always made a stand in all international forums against acts of aggression and interference in the affairs of other States, whoever their perpetrators might be, and has called for the withdrawal of the aggressive and invading forces from the territories of States Members of the United Nations that were the victims of aggression, calls on the General Assembly to discharge its responsibilities by compelling the Zionist entity to withdraw from the Syrian Golan Heights as well as from all the occupied Arab and Palestinian territories, and in addition to impose sanctions against Israel, as provided in the United Nations Charter.
Proceeding from the national commitments of Iraq and because Iraq is so zealous for the sovereignty and independence of all the Arab States, and also proceeding from its continuing initiatives to oppose all acts of aggression by the Zionist occupation authorities against the Arab nation in Palestine, the Golan Heights and Sinai, Iraq reaffirms its fraternal solidarity with Syria and its Arab people and declares its full readiness to stand by Syria at all times in response to the recent Zionist act of aggression, in whatever way and using whatever method and approach will ensure the recovery of its occupied territories.
Mr. JDAVIN (Gabon) (interpretation from French): It is a pleasant duty for me to express the pleasure which the Gabonese delegation feels at seeing Ambassador Kittani once again in the President's seat and at taking part, under his enlightened leadership, in the work of our current emergency special session.
I should also like to reiterate to our new Secretary-General, Mr. Javier Perez de Cuellar, our satisfaction at his assumption of the distinguished post he fills through a unanimous vote of confidence from the Member States. Aware of his great moral and intellectual qualities, as well of his proven ability and total devotion to the ideals and the cause of the United Nations, we are sure that in him we shall find both an experienced guide and a firm defender of our Organization. We once again extend our best wishes to him for success in the fulfilment of his lofty and delicate mission.
On l4 December the Israeli Government enacted a measure which subjected the occupied Syrian territory of the Golan Heights to Israeli laws, jurisdiction and administration. That measure, which was promptly adopted by the Knesset, the country's Parliament, paves the way to a dangerous process of annexation.
In the face of that act, which constitutes a violation of international law and defiance of the international community, the members of the Security Council, through their resolution 497 (l98l) of 17 December, unanimously rejected the Israeli initiative, declaring it null and void and without international legal effect. Gabon unreservedly adheres to that position and considers the unilateral act committed by Israel to be illegal, null and void.
Our Organization has been concerned with the situation in the Middle East for more than 35 years now, and the United Nations has worked tirelessly to find a just and lasting solution acceptable to all the countries in that sorely tried region.
My country's delegation, which has always supported and continues to support all efforts by our Organization can only deplore the fact that the situation is still unsettled as a result of the non-respect for and non-fulfilment of the relevant resolutions of the United Nations, particularly Security Council resolution 242 (1967).
According to that resolution, which stresses the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war, the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East is based in particular on the termination of all states of belligerence and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty and independence of "every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force" (Security Council resolution 242 (1967).
Not only does the unilateral action by Israel not meet those requirements, it constitutes 3 on the contrary, a new source of tension which is far from fostering the climate of peace and security which the region so badly needs. The worsening of the situation in the occupied Syrian territories, stemming from the maintenance of the Israeli occupation and the steps just taken by the Israeli Government as the occupying Power, cause us the gravest concern.
That is why Gabon, which is unshakably attached to the principles of our Charter, calls on Israel strictly to respect its international obligations by rescinding all the measures which it has already taken and by refraining in the future from taking new measures which would modify the legal status, geographical character or demographic composition of the Arab territories occupied since 1967, in accordance with Security Council resolution 465 (1980).
The vast majority of Member States have already clearly shown their opposition to Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights by adopting during the thirty- sixth session of the General Assembly resolution 36/226/B of 17 December 198l, which declares that the unilateral measure taken by Israel to annex the occupied Syrian territory of the Golan Heights is illegal and null and void and without international legal effect. Accordingly, that action could not affect the continued application of the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War.
In conclusion, the Government of Gabon, faithful to its political philosophy based on dialogue, tolerance and peace, would like to make an urgent appeal to the great Powers, the permanent members of the Security Council which have responsibility for the maintenance of peace in the world, and to the nations directly involved in the conflict in the Middle East so that reason and wisdom, which alone can restore peace and security in that cruelly torn region, may prevail.
The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Spanish): I shall now call on those representatives who wish to speak in exercise of their right of reply.
May I remind Members that in accordance with resolution 34/401 of the General Assembly, statements made in exercise of the right of reply shall be limited to 10 minutes and must be made by representatives from their places.
Mr. SHEHATA (Egypt) (interpretation from Arabic): Those who are present in this hall have heard many speakers who have defended the cause of international peace and justice as well as the cause of the Middle Fast. Among those speakers, some support the historic peace process "begun by Egypt through President Sadat, while others oppose it and strongly criticize it. We respect the views and opinions of all., even if they are not the same as ours in regard to that process which we consider to be modern and democratic.
But that is not the subject I wish to discuss here. The representatives present in this hall have never heard anyone speak as did the representative of Iran, who descended to depths that are in complete contradiction to ethical standards and to Islamic precepts. The precepts of our religion forbid one to speak in that way or to criticize individuals who have departed this life. But we see that today, in Iran, the prevailing system runs counter to the precepts of Islam and those of tolerance. Through genocide and constant bloody massacres, that system brings the history of Islam into disrepute, and as the Holy Book states. "He who kills a soul kills the entire world."
As to the criticisms of President Sadat, they are unworthy of reply, because they are based on lies and are thus contrary to the precepts of Islam. The system prevailing in Iran runs completely counter to our religion.
As to the disputes between Egypt and the other Arab countries, that question only concerns Egypt and those other Arab countries; they are disputes which will be settled among the members of the family themselves.
1 should like to reaffirm here that the disputes between Egypt and its Arab brothers are only transitory, temporary and fortuitous. Those disputes will quickly be resolved and, in the near future, we will unite in solidarity with our Arab brothers much more quickly than the representative of Iran or other representatives Imagine - in order to face the danger that threatens the security of our country, whatever its source. As Egypt and the Arab countries have always done, our countries will unite once again to rise up against the slaughters and to face the traitors in Iran who, by adopting a policy of murder and genocide, have flouted the principles of morality and ethics and all the precepts of Islam.
Mr. RAJAIE (Iran): I believe that the statement produced by the representative of Iraq in which he condemned the Israeli action of annexation, is a statement of self-condemnation, because Iraqis have already occupied a part of our land. Actually, I do not want to go into lengthy detail in exercising my right of reply, I only want to correct some of the small mistakes made by the representative of Iraq.
In his statements he said that the Majlis, or the Parliament in my country, is called Majlis Al Shura in Iran. I think he should correct this, because it is called Majlis Al-Rhura Island, which means the Islamic Council.
I should also like to remind him - and, indeed, to remind all representatives - that a few days ago some 2,000 Iraqi subjects were expelled from Iraq and were left alone in the mountainous, snowy border-land of Kurdistan. Had we not picked them up they would probably have died. If anyone should see the representative of Iraq, please remind him to ask his Head of State not to do such things anymore. They are inhumane.
I have some good news: I believe that most of the land they captured from us has already been freed. Very little remains, and that will, by the grace of God, soon be freed. By that time, I presume that certain changes in the political system in Iraq may have happened, for the Moslem people of Iraq are not satisfied with the system, according to information given to us by 8,000 Iraqi soldiers now living in Iran in peace and happiness. They are working some of them are physicians. They are soon to be visited by their families - if, of course, the Iraqi Government permits those families to travel.
If that change to which some of the Iraqi subjects who are our war captives have referred does take place, then the representative of Iraq will probably not be here much longer, so I do not want to disturb him any more; I would like him to continue with his speeches and say whatever he wants. It is nice to hear him more and more; I hope that his friends will visit him more and more when, as he might, he leaves after the change takes place.
I believe that most of the things he said are lies. A document I produced in this very General Assembly during the last session was a sufficient indication of the fact that Iraq started the war and that it was premeditated and preplanned by Iraq. All those documents were produced here, so I have to say that all liars have bad memories.
Mr. AL-ALI (Iraq)(interpretation from Arabic): Although I am well aware of the facts of this matter, representatives do not need any explanation of what is going on in Iran or of Iran's aggression against neighbouring States because everyone is aware of what is going on in that part of the world. Nevertheless, I think it might be useful to draw the Assembly's attention to certain quite simple facts which could help shed light on the discriminatory nature of the Iranian system; a system which, since its creation, has been working in the interests of imperialism and its alliances in collusion with the Zionist system.
The system in Iran resulted in a brain-drain, and then the system began to devour its own members. There now remains only a skeleton, whose emissary is the representative of Iran. A number of murderers and executioners who take pleasure in killing Iran's sons remain behind. In this connexion I might mention the Iranian press, which speaks with pride of the killing which goes on every day. Almost daily., a sizeable number of innocent children and women are killed by those who claim to be Moslems. In this hall, the members of more than 40 delegations belong to the Islamic faith. They are fully aware of the precepts of Islam and of the tolerance which is a part of that religion. They are well aware that the Iranian system is totally contrary to the tenets of Islam and to its underlying principles.
Everyone in this Assembly is fully aware that the Iranian leaders are in a perpetual state of war against their own people and are attacking the interests of their own people and nation. Not satisfied with that, they have also launched acts of aggression against other countries, beginning with Iraq, and have attacked other countries in the Gulf region.
The representative of Iran has claimed that Iraqi prisoners have stated that the system in Iraq is contrary to Islam. Where are those prisoners? Mr. Khomeini has already killed them all. There is no need to put forward proof of this, because there are witnesses - there have been statements from the representatives of Iran.
How can the representative of Iran say here, in this august Assembly, that he supports the Arab cause while his country is continuing to occupy Arab territories? it is well known that there are three Arab islands which have belonged to the Arab nation for thousands of years. They are Iraqi territory which is occupied by Iran.
They were occupied by force of arms. How can that representative claim to support the Arab cause, the cause of Syria, while his country is occupying other Arab territories as well?
All these allegations and claims he puts forward to make us believe that Iran is against Israel are, we can only believe, mere tales. Representatives are well aware of the objectives of the war launched by Iran against Iraq: Iraq is convinced that the system in Iran, through which the interests of the entire region are being undermined, can only have come about at a price.
Therefore, Iraq will shoulder its responsibilities and will face up to imperialism, expansion and occupation until the Arab cause prevails.
The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Spanish): Before calling once again on the representative of Iran, I would remind him that second statements in exercise of the right of reply are limited to five minutes.
Mr. RAJAIE (Iran): I think that the representative of Iraq put it very well when he said that he did not need to produce any evidence for what he says. It is all right. All statements by the representative of Iraq are statements without evidence-, and I have to remind him again that all liars have bad memories, I should like him to refer to the book Al Ahwaz, published by the Ministry of Information and Culture so to speak - of a peace-loving neighbour. There he will see all the evidence, and I think his statement does need some evidence if he would be kind enough to supply it.
Also I should like him to make one promise before all of us here. If the Baghdad regime collapses 3 I expect him - and I want him to make this promise -not to seek political asylum in the United States. As for the statement of the representative of Egypt I have to say that he is right in the sense that our system is really different from the system of his country in the sense that the Camp David conspiracy is . from our point of view, not an agreement leading to peace. It is a dishonest agreement and a betrayal of the cause of Islam, of Moslems and of the Arab brothers in Islam.
The PRESIDENT (interpretation from Spanish): The representative of Iraq has requested to be allowed to speak in exercise of a second right of reply, I would remind him that he has five minutes according to the rules of procedure of the General Assembly.
Mr. AL-ALI (Iraq) (interpretation from Arabic): The representative of Iran is talking from memory. I should like to remind him that his leader Khomeini was a refugee for 14 years. He lived under the protection of Iraq and enjoyed the generosity of Iraq and of Mr. Hussein's regime, which he wishes to overthrow.
Like all revolutionaries in Iraq, Mr. Hussein did not follow the custom of seeking refuge in the United States and I would remind the Iranian representative that all the members of the Khomeini Islamic Revolution sought asylum in America. Perhaps we have lapses of memory in some cases, but we are still living through those events - Who is Ibrahim Yazidi and to which American club does he belong? He still has United States nationality. Can Qutb Zadah deny that he is American? So how can he speak in the name of Islam when the leaders of his revolution are Americans? Hussein is not accustomed to fleeing from his homeland. Iraqi revolutionaries are known to all the Arabs and to the revolutionaries all over the world. If there is any need, the Iranian representative should ascertain who the real fighters are and who depend on others.
The meeting rose at 6.45 p.m.